A desirable decanter despite not having its stopper, and made all the more interesting with the upper case S on the underside which Bernard has explained previously, in detail, as being from the Liverpool retailer John Stonier & Co. As the mark doesn't include a plimsol line I'm assuming this would not have been one of the pieces sent to the shipping companies - neither can I see anywhere the word Stuart, so am unsure as to date. Millers indicates this pattern originated c. 1930 - does anyone know for how long the factory might have produced this design?, and interesting to see how part of the pattern (the spear like motif) has a more modern counterpart in a R/Brierley decanter (the last pic).Of course, I really need a matching stopper - can anyone help - I'd pay well thanks for looking.

Page 237 of “Miller’s 20th Century Glass” by Andy McConnell has a publicity photography of the Stuart Villiers decanter (complete with pointed stopper) along with a Villiers pattern sherry glass (with shape number 25404) and a cocktail glass in the same pattern.

On page 238 of the same publication, a Stuart decanter and matching cocktail glass are shown with the same basic shape but with a different cut pattern. According to the photo caption ‘this retro-shaped decanter continued until production until at least 1939, appearing in that year’s catalogue cut with 2 further patterns”.

Does anyone have photos of the relevant pages from the 1939 catalogue to share, please?

I recently sold a set of 14 of the Stuart Villiers liquor cocktail glasses, and each one had the underside of the foot acid etched in the centre with the words ‘STUART ENGLAND’ in a style only used between 1926 and 1950.

The pattern seems to have been produced until at least 1939, then re-introduced in the 1950s and renamed as the ‘Oleta’ pattern (under which name the pattern appears on a well-known American glass and china replacements site)

The Stuart Villiers liquor cocktail glasses are superb examples of 1930s Art Deco cut crystal work. The trumpet shaped bowls are cut with a complex pattern, consisting of a circumferential cut just below the rim, followed by a group of four circumferential cuts, forming a band. There is a series of vertical needle cuts, topped by a ‘leaf’ shaped wedge cut. Between adjacent leaf cuts is a pair of small horizontal olive shaped cuts. The tapering stem is pentagonally faceted, with each face being decorated with a series of olive cuts, diminishing in size as they reach the junction with the foot. There is a small collar at the junction of the stem and foot, and the foot is cut on the base with a series of six leaf shaped wedge cuts.

Each glass has a height of approximately 11.7cm, with a diameter at the rim of about 7.2cm and at the foot of about 5.8cm. Each glass weighs approximately 135gm.

thanks - Miller's was in fact my source, although seems I didn't turn the page and spot the comments about 1939. Would agree that the 'Oleta' pattern does appear to be identical to 'Villiers' - although no idea as to what may have given rise to a name change for what seems an identical cut design within the same factory - perhaps just post war re-branding. Rarely do I find oldish decanters this clean, so possibly mine is a later production, and made after the name change to 'Oleta'. The base wear is not what I'd expect from a 1930's piece - but who knows, maybe if the stopper was lost early in its life, the decanter was put to one side and never used.

The U.S. Replacements site appears to be giving a height for the decanter (body only) as 9.1/8", whereas my example is coming out at something like 8.5/8" - maybe this can be accounted for as natural variation.

Of the three or four backstamps for Stuart, these seem to cover lengthy production periods, so on their own don't pin down a manufacturing date, especially where some designs seemed to go on for a very long time - Miller's cite the example of Stuart's 'Beaconsfield' pattern as being in production from 1907 until at least 1975.These linear designs with a kind of tulip bud shape at the end always remind me of Mackintosh and the Glasgow School - bit Art Nouveau ish.

On mine there is a 'matching No.' 22 on the upper surface of the rim flange/lip. I've looked at some other replacement sites - in the U.K. - and can find neither 'Villiers' or 'Oleta' - so don't think I stand much chance of getting my stopper - but maybe I'll find a couple of glasses to go with it

Brain obviously not working very logically................if Bernard is watching, does he know the date that Stonier's would have ceased offering Stuart material (since this was sold via Liverpool). This will tell us, for example, that the piece cannot be later than a certain date.

thanks for the information. The decanter body cost me a tenner in a charity shop the other day, so wouldn't want to ruin the 'bargain' price by spending too much on a stopper - especially as I don't sell on - and I've now convinced my self to start collecting decanters (I have to, since I spent a fortune buying the book)!

Sorry, but this made me think about whether a stopperless decanter is a bargain.

If you had a stopper blown and then cut to match, it would cost in excess of £50.00, meaning that you would have nearly a £20.00 saving on the one(s) for sale on eBay if it came in at the bottom price. Therefore a bargain, that is to say good value for money, but not a give away.

So what is the definition of bargain? I was taught many years ago that when collecting (or dealing) it is value for money.

The other definition is the one that would include the finding of a matching stopper for, say, 50p in a charity shop or boot fair, but then that relies on a combinition of time, timing, and luck .......and may never happen, which leaves you still with 'half' an item.

Of course it can always be used as a carafe, but commercially it's only worth what someone is prepared to pay given the stopper's missing.

Whatever, it's still a nice bit of cut glass

Yes, I do very occasionally buy decanter bases,, but I consider them in lombo until I'm lucky enough to find a matching stopper, which happens with even less 'regularity' as time goes on - maybe once evey five or six years currently.

hello Nigel - yes, I could have passed it by - but three reasons for not doing so, which I feel justify my purchase.

1.............. The charity shop benefited from my tenner - after all, I bought it because I know something of it's attribution, and thus its interest. Other people would ignore it precisly because of the lack of stopper - thus it would remain in the shop, and eventually be thrown away, meaning the charity loses out on my contribution.

2.............. I'm a great believer - if I can't have the whole item - of having at least the major part from which I can learn something of the piece, and since I don't sell on (well, almost never ) I don't have the concern that this is a non-commercial piece of glass.

3...............There is always the million to one chance that I'll find the right stopper - very remote I'd agree, but nonetheless a possibility - and I travel in hope always.

So for me, it's a bargain - not perhaps in an ebay sellers financial sense, but a bargain in that I can possess something of interest without too much expense - perhaps we shouldn't always value pieces in terms of money. The irony is that I have decanters that are two hundred years old with their matching stoppers, yet now have this example plus a Webb's 'Ribbonette' also without its stopper (which being an even older pattern means I probably stand a zero chance of finding that stopper), so that's at least two in limbo.

However, would agree with you that it's not a good habit to get into - buying incomplete decanters - at the least it must indicate to all my admirers that I'm buying at the tacky end of the market, or even worse I need to go to spec savers.